Nexon Rumoured To Launch Takeover Bid For EA

Electronic Arts (EA) shares have recently jumped, as South Korean gaming giant, Nexon, has made a bid to takeover the leading publisher. The rumour was seen on both Forbes and Bloomberg, where they obtained the information from a South Korean newspaper.

Due to the talks of a takeover, EA shares have increased by eight percent overnight, and that comes after trading on a year-long low.

Nexon was originally founded by Kim Jung-Ju, who originally decided to offer free-to-play games such as MapleStory.

If the takeover ever becomes successful, do you think EA would ever move to the free-to-play model? How do you think EA would change as a publisher? It would be an interesting, but somewhat scary change, I think.

What do you mean ‘would they ever move to the free2play model’? They already have a bunch of games available on a F2P basis, including a Battlefield F2P game that utilizes a more modern engine and BF2-oriented gameplay with BF2 map makeovers.

Anyway, I think it’s unlikely the company will see a takeover. EA has too great a presence in Canada, America, Urop and even Africa and Australia for it to be likely that their employees would be happy to have their company/parent company leadership change hands to a S.Korean company.

http://egamer.co.za Dean Oberholzer

Yes, they have a bunch of games on the free-to-play model – and I mean, would they ever move to this model in its entirety?

Nexon is purely free-to-play, where EA has, as you said, a bunch of free-to-play. Mainly iOS / Android games with a few PC here and there. Easiest to mention: Battlefield F2P.

If we had to mention purchase-to-play games, we’d have a very long list which we could make without Googling.

So, moving to the model in its entirety. Sure, it’s farfetched. Nexon is known for that model, though. Just opening up discussion, really.

It’ll never become a takeover where EA ceases to exist, and say you said they have a great presence. I don’t know, they might land up giving up — let’s look at the car industries and how they’ve been bought out by Asian firms.

Although – they were in trouble whereas EA is just having a bad year. It’s hardly comparable to needing a bailout to survive.

Leadership might change where they are just the parent company, or maintain a majority stake, leaving it to be run as is.

What do you think about being left to run as is with profits from shares going to Nexon? Seems viable, really.

http://www.facebook.com/nanonyous Theo Lubbe

I’m pretty sure Nexon isn’t purely F2P. They partner with publishers of games released elsewhere in the world to host servers in S.Korea, and those games don’t become F2P model based. Obviously, there’s a difference between partnering with a company for hosting purposes and actually publishing a game under your own title, but still.

Anyway, as far as ‘takeovers’ are concerned, in the financial world, when you’re a majority shareholder you have a say in the business operations of a company. When a company is ‘taken over’, even if the subsidiaries are left, in large part, to carry on doing their own thing, they still have to report to their principle shareholder(s) with any proposals for new IP, development scheduling, budgets and the like – if their majority shareholder(s) don’t give them the go ahead, they have to either privately finance it or are even disallowed from pursuing the project at all.

Majority shareholders, as the ones determining their own financial future when they greenlight or reject proposals (or even present their own changes to company structure and/or operations), also have very large sway in determining whether or not a game will be based on a F2P model or not.

Anyway, personally I’m of the opinion that a full F2P model for all games going forward is a good idea, provided a very good, clear and most importantly, balanced, roadmap of all future content within a particular ‘sector’ of the game’s development lifetime is publicly known and understood. That is to say, don’t do what Perfect World did with Blacklight and perform a complete overhaul of how all weapons components function without even warning people of these changes beforehand and without offering refunds for items they’ve already bought that now function wholly differently.

This way, people can decide what content they want, what content they want on a permanent basis, can play until they feel they’ve had their fill and/or justified the amount of money they’ve spent on a game. I think games developers would actually find that employing this model would garner far more players of their games and far more returning players, because people are no longer under a massive commitment to spend R350+ on a game only to find they actually hate it, despite what they experienced in its demo.

http://egamer.co.za Dean Oberholzer

@TheoLubbe:disqus – Yea, sure they are involved in other non-purchase – I guess. However, the main model is F2P whereas EA is the other way. That’s all that’s really required to know – no point being over techinical, really.

And discussion have we started :-)

No doubt shareholders are involved, however companies also run where directors are in charge of what’s happening in the running of the business, where the shareholders decide on those directors. Then they will, as you said, run certain things by them. And that’s often why we share shareholder leaks.

Thing is, when it comes down to having too many shareholders, it’s impossible to safely go through all the plans of action (especially in public companies) as competitors might have shares in the company.

That’s my point of view and understanding, at least from the South African perspective to public firms and shareholders.

Overseas might work differently, or have the same premise (as our law has moved to a more USA styled for companies) — and it would be somewhat obvious that a lot of it needs to be private.

Sometimes I really hate an overabundance of micro-transactions though — it could become more than a normal price, or you might be screwed because the ‘richest kid’ has the coolest stuff from the beginning, spoiling your game.

It’s sometimes cool, sometimes bad — depends on how it’s done.

I definitely think that it has upsides as well, though. And can be made to better the industry a great deal.

http://www.facebook.com/nanonyous Theo Lubbe

Disqus needs to l2thread…

Anyway. Not sure what part of Crytek’s CEO wanting F2P and their developers wanting second-hand games to diaf is weird – on a successful, well implemented publisher-centric F2P model, you have a unified profile (ala steam) and have a single primary currency you use for your transactions between these different games.

Assuming that model, F2P is a good thing for abolishing second-hand games – sure, you could buy the ‘base’ game from your buddy, but you’re not going to get the content he bought for his profile, not unless he sells his entire profile to you.

Additionally, the most successful F2P models are ones where you’re paying to play how you want to play, now paying just to keep pace with your competitors. I recommend you give Blacklight a try in that regard. There are currently the following primary and secondary weapon classes available, of which only the first is given to you on a ‘permanent’ basis. When referring to range, keep in mind that there are three ‘tiers’ of damage. Within the first range, you will do full damage. Between the first range and second, you will do reduced damage. Beyond the second range, you will do significantly reduced damage.

Primary: Assault Rifle All-round good weapon. Recoil severity is moderate, ROF is moderate, damage is moderate, range profiles are moderate, accuracy in the different stances (aim down sight, shoot from hip, max spread) are moderate, run speed is moderate. This weapon offers the best balance for any gametype and can be used to great effect if customized to suit the playstyle you intend on working with.

Bolt-Action Rifle Single-shot bolt-action sniper rifle oriented weapon. Recoil is massive, so realigning your sights is necessary after every shot. Damage, on the other hand, is second to none, and can take out most weakened enemies with a body shot, and is guaranteed to kill with a headshot (almost) regardless of customization. 100% accuracy when aimed down sights, useless from the hip, really slow run speed and a long reload time.

Combat Rifle In-betweener for the Assault Rifle and Bolt-Action Rifle, these are semi-automatic and can take out most enemies with two body shots, but have a limited clip capacity and still make you run fairly slowly. Near 100% to 100% accuracy down sights, useless from the hip, missing with this isn’t an option since you’ll usually be dead by the time you have to get your third or fourth shot into someone. You simply don’t square off against someone that has a bolt-action rifle with one of these.

Burst-Fire Rifle In-betweener for the Assault Rifle and Combat Rifle, fires three-round bursts of slightly higher damage than an AR but less than a combat rifle. Spread increases rapidly within a burst, so your configuration will determine whether it’s at all usable beyond a medium range – that being said, if you sacrifice damage, you can get great accuracy at high ranges. Has a great run speed. Like the combat rifle, missing isn’t an option, as the half-second pause between bursts can kill you. Generally takes two bursts to down most people, one if you’re lucky enough to get a headshot in on one or two of the burst’s rounds.

SMG Best CQB weapon, gives the lowest recoil and spread but has absolutely terrible range profiling, useless at anything beyond medium range. Does relatively low damage per shot but makes up for it in ROF and spread from the hip. Builds suited to using this weapon are those that will allow you to move around on the map as quickly as possible, flanking the enemy – these builds also make you paper thin, so you have only one shot to take out the entire enemy team before you’re dead.

Light Machine Gun Suppressive fire weapon, does moderate damage and has a really, really slow run speed. About useless aiming down sights on account of the recoil, generally intended to make the enemy afraid to pop out around corners. Has decent range profiling.

Heavy Assault Rifle An in-betweener for the AR and LMG, also has absolutely terrible recoil, making it useless for sustained fire. Has a better run speed, reload speed and range than an LMG, so with the right configuration can still be used for mid-ranged covering fire. Excellent when used well in close quarters, particlarly when the enemy is tightly packed.

Secondary:

Light Pistol Shouldn’t ever be used as anything but a fallback weapon. Does similar damage to an AR but has terrible range. High rate of fire and low spread, though, so can be easier to take down single enemies with than an AR in a CQB fight. Moderate running speed.

Heavy Pistol Does the damage of a combat rifle with the ROF of an SMG (semi-auto) and accuracy of an AR. Still a close-ranged weapon, however. Slower running speed than the Light pistol.

Revolver 5-8 rounds, does the damage of a bolt-action rifle but at close to mid ranges. Has a high recoil and spread, and is useless when not aiming down sights. Very slow running speed, slow recovery in accuracy from sprinting.

Shotgun Useless at anything but close quarters. Ideally used to take down a group of enemies, good fallback weapon to the Bolt-Action or Combat Rifle. Does moderate damage and has a low ROF – you’re lucky if you take someone down in one shot. Slowest running speed, slowest recovery in accuracy from sprinting.

Tactical Machine Pistol Like a pocket SMG but with a really small ammo pool. Recoil is impossibly high, so best used in bursts – using in bursts, however, will result in an opening for the enemy to retaliate and take you down. Great running speed but needs a slight pause after sprinting or it’s useless.

So in essence, all of the weapons have their place to be used and accommodate different playstyles, and they all cost pretty much the same – their mods as well. The only real thing that differentiates them is that they unlock at different points in your character’s progression. What’s nice, however, is that every time you level (and there are 30 levels in total), you gain a pack of 3-day items so you can test things out. In relative terms, it’s cheap to get an item for 1 day using the play-derived currency (free) so you can test items out. Buying items permanently is equivalent to buying an item every day for 1 day, for a total of around 20 days.

I’ve used practically all the weapons and different combinations of mods there are to be used (worth using for the weapons I used them on) so far, and I can tell you now that every single one of them has their own strengths and weaknesses.

Just because you’ve fitted your gun for the highest damage and range combination possible doesn’t mean it’s actually going to be *accurate* at that range, but it’ll be damned accurate at mid-range. Now the only problem is that your stock sucks ass and your recoil is thus so bad that you can’t burst for more than a few shots. That’s fine if you’re in a CQB fight, though, since you’re going to be accurate enough for long enough to mow people down with headshots.

Fitted for mid-range? Now the weapon handles poorly in CQB. Fitted for long-range? You’re slow as hell now and your weapon’s even worse suited for CQB purposes. Everyone eventually finds their balance of mods that just ‘feels right’ to them, and you’ll practically never pick up someone else’s weapon only to find it’s the same layout as yours.

/spam

reV

Oh boy, assholes want to take over assholes, this ought to be interesting to watch.

And Nexon’s microtransaction models are quite disgusting, same with most Jap/Korean MMOs out there, I’d honestly prefer P2P/sub-based games than their rigged motherfucking microtransactions.

http://egamer.co.za Dean Oberholzer

Alright. I believe your Asian-knowledge. I’m now against this.

reV to the rescue! :-)

Spencer

I have played Maplestory on and off for 4 years. I had a great time but due to continual problems on Nexon’s side that managed Maplestory it lead to me quitting. They would neglect their server issues and hackers would flood the game with little being done. At the same time exploiting the game helped numerous players (obviously) although it took the fun away. On that complaint I would not like to see Nexon take over EA, it could get worse :<